Verizon approves nine phones, five tablets for Android 4.0 upgrade

Verizon announced a list phones and tablets that will make the Android 4. …

Verizon announced a short list of phones to be upgraded to Android 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich in a press release today. The carrier is vague about whether it plans to add to the list.

The smartphones confirmed for an upgrade include the HTC Thunderbolt, Droid Incredible 2, HTC Rhyme, and HTC Rezound; the Motorolas Bionic, Razr, Razr Maxx, and Droid 4; and the LG Spectrum. Tablets include the Motorola Xoom, Droid Xyboard 8.2 and Droid Xyboard 10.1; and the Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 and Tab 7.7.

This leaves a lot of phones and tablets flapping in the breeze, including some that came out only last fall such as the Samsung Stratosphere, the Motorola Droid 3, and the Motorola Photon 4G. The Stratosphere wasn't in Samsung's plans when it announced phones it planned to upgrade in December. Likewise, the Droid 3 and Photon 4G are down in Motorola's list of planned upgrades as "further details to follow."

Most phones whose Gingerbread fate has been sealed, like the Droid X and Droid 2, are well over a year old (and in many cases nearing their second birthday). With this in mind, it makes sense not to work towards upgrading them. But it would be a bold move for both the carrier and manufacturers to not pursue an Android 4 upgrade for phones much younger than that. Of course, companies are already taking many months to get the Android 4 upgrade out to customers. By the time they even get around to the case of these less high-profile phones, they may be beyond saving from the corporate point of view.

It's been 5 months since ICS was released and the only ICS phone I can get from my carrier is Nexus. At this rate ICS will be a year old when there is wide availability of new phones. (Yeah, they all promise an update will be coming. I had a Moto Flipout. Not going to fall for that again.) Maybe Win Mo 7 is the way to go. Tired of my mobile OS being perpetually out of date.

Dropping the Droid. I've had the DroidX since Dec 2010 and when my contract is up I'll be making the switch to iPhone5. My new employer issued me an iPhone4S and the difference is astounding. The only beef I have is with the screen size but iPhone5 will be 4" which should be "enough".

This leaves a lot of phones and tablets flapping in the breeze, including some that came out only last fall such as the Samsung Stratosphere, the Motorola Droid 3, and the Motorola Photon 4G. The Stratosphere wasn't in Samsung's plans when it announced phones it planned to upgrade in December. Likewise, the Droid 3 and Photon 4G are down in Motorola's list of planned upgrades as "further details to follow."

To be fair to Motorola, they have been busy with other priorities lately and thus haven't been able to spare resources for their Android software efforts.

This is a perfect example of why I buy my phones unlocked and root them shortly after purchase.

Then again, the type of people that really care about having the latest version are mostly the same people that like to tinker, so meh. Show me a bunch of things I can do with 4.0 that I couldn't do with 2.3.x, and I'll be concerned. Most apps(and the framework itself) are written with backwards compatibility in mind, as they should be in any environment, so it's really not that big a deal.

Does this mean that all the publicly available exploits for Android 3.0 (Droid 2) remain not patched until I buy a new phone? Is the Android browser even getting updates? If my kernel is locked, does this mean any kernel exploits remain exploitable even if I root and flash Cyanogen mod?

Does this mean that all the publicly available exploits for Android 3.0 (Droid 2) remain not patched until I buy a new phone? Is the Android browser even getting updates? If my kernel is locked, does this mean any kernel exploits remain exploitable even if I root and flash Cyanogen mod?

I dont' think you are running 3.0 on your Droid 2; that would be 2.3.x. What do you mean by kernel is locked? Do you really mean the boot loader?

Even cyanogen relies on fixes via the AOSP to fix holes. But the majority of stuff can be patched via the market anyhow, and the last holdout, the browser, is now being addressed with Chrome.

Dropping the Droid. I've had the DroidX since Dec 2010 and when my contract is up I'll be making the switch to iPhone5. My new employer issued me an iPhone4S and the difference is astounding. The only beef I have is with the screen size but iPhone5 will be 4" which should be "enough".

I actually have both those phones. I have a DroidX on one line and an iPhone 4s on my second (work) line.

I actually like the android more than the iPhone, but I use the iPhone for things like webbrowsing because the DroidX now feels slow in comparison because it is now basically dated hardware.

Siri does a few things well, like setup reminders for me, or set alarms, but the rest of what it does I personally don't find useful. I also like the camera more simply because it is faster.

Although if you were to compare something like a Galaxy Nexus (or lets say something even newer that we dont know about yet that will be available in the iPhone 5 timeframe) then I am sure the android would stack up better against an iPhone.

Having google maps GPS is almost enough reason alone to keep my in the android camp. I could get a standalone GPS, but I have exchange sync with my calendar which puts the addresses of my appointments on the phone and 1 click away from GPS navigation. I am on the road a bit, so typing 20 new addresses in my GPS each week would get annoying.

If verizon can get a decent Windows phone out, I would consider moving to an android/windows combo instead, since the things people love about the iPhone I tend to not need or use.

Well, that it's faster and that the iPhone4S's camera makes the DroidX's camera look like a toy. Honestly the pic quality between the two isn't even close. Motorola has a long way to go.

kleinma wrote:

Having google maps GPS is almost enough reason alone to keep my in the android camp. I could get a standalone GPS, but I have exchange sync with my calendar which puts the addresses of my appointments on the phone and 1 click away from GPS navigation. I am on the road a bit, so typing 20 new addresses in my GPS each week would get annoying.

No argument there, and that's another good point you've made. Google Maps beats the crap out of the iPhone's map app.

kleinma wrote:

If verizon can get a decent Windows phone out, I would consider moving to an android/windows combo instead, since the things people love about the iPhone I tend to not need or use.

I would love a Windows phone, too. I would give up both iOS and Android for Windows.

This all being said, the point I was trying to make earlier that I never made (heh) was that I am sick of being so far behind in updates. Android 2.3.4 feels so dated now and I wanted like nothing else to have ICS loaded by Spring.

From the article:This leaves a lot of phones and tablets flapping in the breeze, including some that came out only last fall such as the Samsung Stratosphere, the Motorola Droid 3, and the Motorola Photon 4G.

Previewed in May 2011, released to devs in October 2011. 5 months later, and 9 phones only are getting this, and not even today, but AT ALL? And a slew of other devices that meet the technical requirements to run it, including some launched AFTER ICS was available, will not get it. And also the carreir clearly interfering on some leval as other phones verizon carries are getting ICS, just not as sold by Verizon (cross carrier models get it)?

So much for Google's voluntary 18 month lifecycle program, huh.

This is a core reason Android vendors have extremely low customer loyalty. A device that's still in its first year warranty, and launched after the OS was demoed and anounced, in some cases even released, that are compatible, and they won't get it. How's that burn feel?

This is a perfect example of why I buy my phones unlocked and root them shortly after purchase.

Then again, the type of people that really care about having the latest version are mostly the same people that like to tinker, so meh. Show me a bunch of things I can do with 4.0 that I couldn't do with 2.3.x, and I'll be concerned. Most apps(and the framework itself) are written with backwards compatibility in mind, as they should be in any environment, so it's really not that big a deal.

No, the people who mostly care are families who have multiple handsets, when the wife or kids can no longer all run the same OS version and start having issues sharing apps they purchased. Tinkerers (the 1%), don't care, they shrug and root (if they CAN since many devices are still boot locked preventing it), its the general public Android has to worry about. MOST of android's success is not fandroids, its the common Joe who bought one because their fandroid friend recommended it (even through corporate IT won't let them sync their email account to it, or won't support it if they do), or because it was on BoGo, or free or some other big promotional push.

My parents got duped by this. So did my wife's parents, my sister and brother-in-law, my uncle's family, and lots of people I work with. (none of them bothered to ask me before buying phones, their own damned fault). Then they all come to me asking for help I can't give them. Watching them all at christmas trying to configure new phones for each other that in many cases ran the SAME OS but different UIs to the point they could not even figure out how to create home screen icons was almost funny. What should we say, "everyone in your house has to buy the same handset or deal with inconsistancy like this, even though they're all buying on the same day either way?" no.

Google needs to get control of this shit. Manufacturers should have to agree that 1) Any UI customizations must be applied as layers, or options that can be disabled without adversely effecting phone operation, always permitting "naked android" to porevail at the user's request through simpe configurable options and never jailbreaking. and 2) for 12 months after last sale, or 18 months from first sale, whichever comes SECOND, any android OS released within that timeframe will be released for that device (if it meets the base minimum google config for that release) within 90 days of source code release. If not, a significant extra licensing fee should be charged (or BACK-charged) by Google to the manufacturer, including refusing to allow any NEW devices to be licensed with android until the release is made if delayed.

If I buy a phone, and on the same day my wife buys a similar phone, then we should fully expect that within a few weeks (tops) when a new OS is available compatible with our devices, we BOTH get it, within reasonable time from our purchase. Anything less, and the basal simple consumer will soon reject android. Fragmentation is very real, and the average Joe feels these issues WAY more than you think they do. College kids, singles, not so big a deal, but when families are buying multiple phones, and stuff they already bought from previous versions or even on their individual phones is not compatible it creates major consumer dissappointment, and returns. When upgrades are later not applied to some and to others, it causes customers to blacklist manufacturers, which for most of these companies extends WAY beyond phones. I know people who won't even considder an LG or Samsung TV anymore because they got burned on an Android phone. This is a huge issue.

Joy, my Droid Charge seems abandoned, and without the RIL for the LTE antennae, it's hard to update to AOSP. It runs great with Gingerbread, but this phone is under a year old and already feels abandoned.

Most phones whose Gingerbread fate has been sealed, like the Droid X and Droid 2, are well over a year old (and in many cases nearing their second birthday). With this in mind, it makes sense not to work towards upgrading them.

It's a sad world where tech 1-2 years old is too obsolete to bother with.

The sad part isn't that they don't want to do it, that's a foregone conclusion. (Carriers and manufacturers will obviously upgrade the absolute minimum they can, as new-phone-envy drives a lot of sales.)

No, the sad part is that these $800 phones are now so widely considered disposable that others (like the article author) agree.

As tech-inclined folks here on Ars, why are you letting the wireless companies dictate your upgrades to you? Heck, one of the first (popular) series of articles on Ars was how to overclock your celerons.

Visit sites like xda-developers, rootzwiki, and find out what the dev community is doing to upgrade your phone. It's your phone, you paid for it, and there are no rules regarding what you can run on it - unless you happen to work for uncle sam.

Let motorola upgrade a few handsets, let VZ drag their feet until the cows come home, it's not your problem anymore. Use the resources available to you - even the venerable droid is getting an ICS port - chances are you'll find someone working on your phone too.

I guess I am not tech enough to want to root my phone (a Droid 3), but I am noting the difference in "upgradeability" between Android and iPhones. My next phone will likely be an iPhone, and I will likely not go through Verizon.

As long as you keep leasing phones instead of buying them, carriers do have a say, it's as simple as that.

Also, the reason manufacturers themselves don't give a crap about upgrading 2 year old phones is this: daily Android activations went up from 60k in Jan'10, to 300k in Jan'11, and 850k in Jan'12.

Just think about it for a second: for everyone that activated an Android phone 2 years ago, there are 15 people activating Android phones right now.

With the exponential of growth in Android is experiencing, satisfying new customers (even at the expense of return customers) is paramount. When new Android activations level off (which will happen in about a year at above 1M daily activations), return customers become more important, and we'll see how well Google and manufacturers manage that transition.

The only reason at all this is happening is because of verizon... They get so many different handsets so fast, aka the 20 different droid models that they currently have out. If they would let the manu do the os and just do a final verification i bet alot more would be upgraded.

I hate Sense so I'm just waiting for Cyanogenmod 9 to come out. The Thunderbolt will be officially supported instead of being a ROM that a single guy put together (though I'm thankful to have at least that).

As long as you keep leasing phones instead of buying them, carriers do have a say, it's as simple as that.

Also, the reason manufacturers themselves don't give a crap about upgrading 2 year old phones is this: daily Android activations went up from 60k in Jan'10, to 300k in Jan'11, and 850k in Jan'12.

Just think about it for a second: for everyone that activated an Android phone 2 years ago, there are 15 people activating Android phones right now.

With the exponential of growth in Android is experiencing, satisfying new customers (even at the expense of return customers) is paramount. When new Android activations level off (which will happen in about a year at above 1M daily activations), return customers become more important, and we'll see how well Google and manufacturers manage that transition.

Satisfying new customers is important. I'm not sure it's "paramount". It seems like in a lot of cases the 'droid vendors are burning bridges behind them almost as fast as they are charging forward. At some point that's going to become a serious problem. In a lot of ways, buying a 'droid phone is a crap shoot. Even months after a major OS release many (most?) new phones are being sold with old versions of the OS and may never get the new version? Really? Just poking around on a single carriers site (Verizon) I was easily able to find three different OS versions being sold (ICS, Gingerbread and Eclair are all available.) Eclair? Come on, that's two years old now! I think the reality with 'droid is that a buyer should assume that their device will probably have an old version of the OS when they buy it, and it's never going to get an upgrade. It seems like a lot of them are basically unsupported from day 1. The vendors probably never had any intention of every providing any level of ongoing support. It's pure sell and forget.

Think part of the problem is Google does not give out the SDK before release for the manufacturers to start working on it where Apple is Apple and is working on it with a set deadline and give it to carriers to test.

Motorola blog post in Dec:3. Submit the upgrade to the carriers for certification

This is the point in the process where the carrier’s lab qualifies and tests the upgrade. Each carrier has different requirements for phases 2 and 3. There may be a two-month preparation cycle to enter a carrier lab cycle of one to three months.

The other side of the problem is they keep coming out with some slightly different model every 3 months. Pick 3 styles and stick to yearly updates to those.

They are too obsessed with releasing yet another very slightly version of one of their phones every week. Thus, they have to re-tweak their implementation constantly. How many different screen resolutions are in "current" models?

Even the Galaxy S II had, what, 4 different versions - one for each carrier... and I think even different screen sizes/resolutions (not to mention different CPUs). That, my friends, is why old phones are not upgraded. They're too busy shooting their own feet out, while buying new guns.

MOST of android's success is not fandroids, its the common Joe who bought one because their fandroid friend recommended it (even through corporate IT won't let them sync their email account to it, or won't support it if they do)

Interesting that you should mention that... I just found out today that our IT department is starting to move people from Blackberries to Android as the preferred platform for work phones. Obviously, this is purely anecdotal evidence, you can't extrapolate from one data point, etc., but I thought it was interesting.

Is there really any evidence that there's a large pool of companies that support iOS but not Android?

P.S. I'm currently planning a pilot for a mobile enterprise app, and since we have users with all sorts of devices (iPhones, Android, BlackBerry, WinPhone, maybe others), I'm thinking I'm going to use jQuery Mobile for the basic app interface, and then PhoneGap to integrate it with however many platforms we have the resources to support more fully. Does anybody have any other suggestions I should look at?

They are too obsessed with releasing yet another very slightly version of one of their phones every week. Thus, they have to re-tweak their implementation constantly. How many different screen resolutions are in "current" models?

Even the Galaxy S II had, what, 4 different versions - one for each carrier... and I think even different screen sizes/resolutions (not to mention different CPUs). That, my friends, is why old phones are not upgraded. They're too busy shooting their own feet out, while buying new guns.

Still, it's not gonna make me move to a walled garden.

Well it isn't really avoidable with the SII example - you have LTE on 700mhz, CDMA, then you have TMob on 1700mhz which is why it has the Snapdragon (which in some ways is better, it gives much better battery life). Iphone? You like your 3G as slow as 12 year old DSL or crappy Att service?